Disposed

M/S. Aelite Logistics and Marketing Private Limited, Bhubaneswar v. Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) Ct and GST Territorial Range,Bhubaaneswar

Orissa HC7 Nov 2024WP(C)/26661/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Orissa disposed of a writ petition regarding deposit requirements for staying a first appellate order. Relying on a Central Government notification reducing the deposit to 10%, the Court directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax for the order to remain stayed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; order stayed on deposit of 10% of the remaining disputed tax.

M/S. Aelite Logistics and Marketing Private Limited… — GST and Indirect Tax | Orissa HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No.26661 of 2024

¶2

M/s. Aelite Logistics and …. Petitioner Marketing Private Limited, Bhubaneswar

¶3

Represented by Advocate(s) –

¶4

Mr. K.K. Sahoo, Advocate

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

Joint Commissioner of State Tax …. Opposite Parties (Appeal) CT and GST Territorial Range, Bhubaneswar and others

¶7

Represented by Advocate(s) –

¶8

Mr. S. Mishra, Advocate (Standing Counsel)

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO

¶11

ORDER

¶12

07.11.2024

¶13

WP(C) no.26661 of 2024 and I.A. no.14131 of 2024

¶14

Order No. 01.

¶15

1. Mr. Sahoo, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client is aggrieved by order dated 12^th October, 2023 made by the First Appellate Authority. It wants to appeal therefrom to the Tribunal but it has not yet been

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

constituted. In the circumstances assessees and the department were complying with directions made on order dated 16^th February, 2024 by the First Division Bench in a batch of writ petitions, lead case being WP(C) no.42015 of 2023 (M/s. Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha and others) .

¶18

2. The directions included requiring the assessee to deposit

¶19

10% of the disputed amount of tax on filing the appeal and further 20% of remaining disputed tax, for the impugned order to be stayed.

¶20

3. He submits, his client is up against State revenue. There was notification dated 16^th August, 2024 made by Central revenue reducing latter deposit to 10%. Now, State revenue has correspondingly notified on 29^th October, 2024. In the circumstances, the writ petition be disposed of as covered by order dated 16^th February, 2024 (supra) with modification for deposit of 10% of remaining disputed tax for impugned order to remain stayed.

¶21

4. Mr. Mishra, learned advocate, Standing Counsel appears on behalf of State revenue.

¶22

5. We accept submission made on behalf of petitioner regarding corresponding notification reducing requirement of

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

the deposit to 10% of disputed tax for impugned first appellate order to remain stayed. The deposit be made accordingly.

¶25

6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶26

(Arindam Sinha)

¶27

Judge

¶28

(M.S. Sahoo) Judge

¶29

Prasant

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR SAHOO Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 07-Nov-2024 19:16:33

¶32

Page 3 of 3

M/S. Aelite Logistics and Marketing Private Limited, Bhubaneswar v. Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) Ct and GST Territorial Range,Bhubaaneswar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Aelite Logistics and Marketing Private Limited, Bhubaneswar v. Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) Ct and GST Territorial Range,Bhubaaneswar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alok Kumar Mohapatra Vs Income Tax Officer,Khurda

Ashis Mohapatra Vs Madhumita Behera

Siddharth Barai Vs Superintendent, Bolangir Circle, Odisha

Pramod Kumar Rout Vs Puspita Rout

Pramod Kumar Rout Vs Puspita Rout

Baban Das Vs State of Odisha